If you buy a regular phone - sure, you get what you paid for and nothing else, *but* that is not acceptable in a smartphone market. If you buy a smatphone you buy into a platform and you expect that all further development of such platform would also be applicable to your particular device. At least for a few years.
Almost all iPhone software today works fine on the first iPhones ever produced 2.5 years (and two generations) ago. And the software updates work on all models and brands of iPhones in the same way and come out in the same time.
WinMo is worse in this context, but why would anyone aim for the bottom?
If Nokia comes out with Maemo 6 and it will not be possible to update n900 to it the same day, then it will devalue greatly not only the n900, but also the new Maemo 6 phone they just released, because people will realise that it also will be a phone that will only be supported for a year.
The new features that people expect to be developed over the lifespan of the physical device are in the calculation when evaluating the price of the device. 500$ for a device that will be developed for at least 3 years? Sure! 500$ for a great device that will have a bugfix release and then will become obsoleted? No thanks.
I'm afraid I'm going to disagree with you; basically, you seem to be saying "Apple does it this way, so Nokia must". But if you look at the two companies, their business methods and models are completely different in just about every respect - global markets, open v closed, single device or multiple platform... why the assumption that in this respect Nokia will do what Apple does? I've never seen any evidence that Nokia introduce new features to devices. And that's certainly not in my contract of purchase with them.
What I think Nokia have done is recognise the need for applications and the like to be forward, backwards and even sideways compatible. To this end they've invested a great deal of money in the acquisition of Trolltech to obtain a platform that will make software transferable regardless of which version of maemo (or even symbian eventually) you're running.
Smartphones may be 'like desktop computers' in terms of upgradablity. But the reality is that older tech doesn't cut new systems. Try running Win 7 on a 32 bit device. My first computer had 4mb of RAM... which would probably not manage even vista. (Or anything else, really.) In a handheld device the firmware is even more closely tied to the physical reality of the device. If the major new feature of Maemo 6 is multi-touch... how are you going to implement that 'new feature' on n900? What if maemo 6 is a return to the tablet form and doesn't support sim cards? Will you want to upgrade?
Right now we have no idea what Maemo6 will contain, apart from a few rumours. I think it likely it will have a completely different and incompatible feature set. I rely on the community to go on with adding features that n900 CAN support, and look to Nokia to go on working with the bugs.
And I will disagree with youaigariusJanuary 31 2010, 16:12:26 UTC
Ok, let's say it the way it is: this is not a smartphone. It is an Internet Tablet (as were N770, N800 and N810) with cell phone functionality. And it is a tablet with Linux on it. And it is a tablet with Linux for which Nokia wants to create a community. Unfortunately, Nokia has a weird concept of community: whenever it brings out a new tablet version, it basically drops earlier versions, and makes it very difficult for interested developers to keep upgrading them (see, for example, binary drivers that haven't been open-sourced or the wifi management software). For the record, I own an N800 and an N810 (this one I got second-hand). I won't buy a new N900 the way things are going. I will probably wait until Mer is further along to save me the worries about Nokia deciding to not add requested functionalities on completely non-technical basis _and_ not letting people do it easily (WPA-PAP, for example, which Nokia WONTFIXed because they were already focused on the oh-so-shiny N900). You talk abou older technology not being able to run new software, and you are almost right. I can't run Windows 7 on a 486 either, but I certainly can run it on a 6 year old computer. How is it Fremantle (N900's version of Maemo) can't run on N810 at all? It's a two-year old technology. And there's people outside Nokia working on doing it. Perhaps there are no accelerometres in N810, but then again it's not a killer feature. And now Nokia is dropping a significant part of its users again. Well, it's their product, but repeatedly snubbing your power users doesn't look like a good long term strategy. The Ovi map is another case in point. Both Symbian and Maemo have it, both have a full working version, and yet only Symbian users get it now for free. What can the reason be? It's not like making it available por N900 users would require new regression tests, right? I can't help but wonder.
I have to agree on that, Apple supports old devices for generations and so does the Android ecosystem. We are not talking about a 5 years commitment to support old hardware, but at least 1-2 OS generations that last 1-2 years.
Simply saying that you have to be happy with watch you bought is completely denying the fact that the smartphone market has changed. What you describe is the old Windows Mobile way of thinking. The new kids on the block have set new standards, and you have no other choice than to follow them now.
Almost all iPhone software today works fine on the first iPhones ever produced 2.5 years (and two generations) ago. And the software updates work on all models and brands of iPhones in the same way and come out in the same time.
WinMo is worse in this context, but why would anyone aim for the bottom?
If Nokia comes out with Maemo 6 and it will not be possible to update n900 to it the same day, then it will devalue greatly not only the n900, but also the new Maemo 6 phone they just released, because people will realise that it also will be a phone that will only be supported for a year.
The new features that people expect to be developed over the lifespan of the physical device are in the calculation when evaluating the price of the device. 500$ for a device that will be developed for at least 3 years? Sure! 500$ for a great device that will have a bugfix release and then will become obsoleted? No thanks.
Reply
What I think Nokia have done is recognise the need for applications and the like to be forward, backwards and even sideways compatible. To this end they've invested a great deal of money in the acquisition of Trolltech to obtain a platform that will make software transferable regardless of which version of maemo (or even symbian eventually) you're running.
Smartphones may be 'like desktop computers' in terms of upgradablity. But the reality is that older tech doesn't cut new systems. Try running Win 7 on a 32 bit device. My first computer had 4mb of RAM... which would probably not manage even vista. (Or anything else, really.) In a handheld device the firmware is even more closely tied to the physical reality of the device. If the major new feature of Maemo 6 is multi-touch... how are you going to implement that 'new feature' on n900? What if maemo 6 is a return to the tablet form and doesn't support sim cards? Will you want to upgrade?
Right now we have no idea what Maemo6 will contain, apart from a few rumours. I think it likely it will have a completely different and incompatible feature set. I rely on the community to go on with adding features that n900 CAN support, and look to Nokia to go on working with the bugs.
Reply
Unfortunately, Nokia has a weird concept of community: whenever it brings out a new tablet version, it basically drops earlier versions, and makes it very difficult for interested developers to keep upgrading them (see, for example, binary drivers that haven't been open-sourced or the wifi management software).
For the record, I own an N800 and an N810 (this one I got second-hand). I won't buy a new N900 the way things are going. I will probably wait until Mer is further along to save me the worries about Nokia deciding to not add requested functionalities on completely non-technical basis _and_ not letting people do it easily (WPA-PAP, for example, which Nokia WONTFIXed because they were already focused on the oh-so-shiny N900).
You talk abou older technology not being able to run new software, and you are almost right. I can't run Windows 7 on a 486 either, but I certainly can run it on a 6 year old computer. How is it Fremantle (N900's version of Maemo) can't run on N810 at all? It's a two-year old technology. And there's people outside Nokia working on doing it. Perhaps there are no accelerometres in N810, but then again it's not a killer feature.
And now Nokia is dropping a significant part of its users again. Well, it's their product, but repeatedly snubbing your power users doesn't look like a good long term strategy.
The Ovi map is another case in point. Both Symbian and Maemo have it, both have a full working version, and yet only Symbian users get it now for free. What can the reason be? It's not like making it available por N900 users would require new regression tests, right? I can't help but wonder.
Reply
Simply saying that you have to be happy with watch you bought is completely denying the fact that the smartphone market has changed. What you describe is the old Windows Mobile way of thinking. The new kids on the block have set new standards, and you have no other choice than to follow them now.
Reply
Leave a comment